Nate Knows Nada

From AKMA, a slightly tongue-in-cheek definition of Anglicanism:

That’s part of my puzzlement about the current retrospective “This is true
Anglicanism” impulse in some quarters. I had always thought that true
Anglicanism bore with the potty vicar who was sure that Jesus was
really an astral traveller, or that theological doctrine was a
pointless appendix to the finer points of fox-hunting. Such people
come, they occupy seats of greater or lesser prominence and authority,
then they retire or die, and the church itself doesn’t change much. The
point isn’t that we don’t care about error or try to correct error, but
that the Truth is stronger, lasts longer, and eventually renders error
moot. Truth counteracts error from within the church. (And that also
provides us with the opportunity for learning the ways in the church
may need correction — from within.)

Via Ryan, Red State Rabble
notes the following about the “intelligent design” battle going on in
Kansas (BTW, “intelligent design” is the most intelligence-insulting
cover for creationism on the market):

Red State Rabble finds it highly ironic that the battle line between
science and reason on the one hand, and zealotry and ignorance on the
other, have been drawn in a state that is so extraordinarily rich in
the fossil evidence of our evolutionary past.

RSR has seen the
excitement and curiosity in our daughter’s eyes at the sight of marine
fossils so far from the sea. The worst thing about intelligent design,
and its country cousin, creationism, is that it seeks, quite openly, to
deny our children a chance to experience for themselves that sense of
wonder and to replace it with some stern, all-knowing, Old Testament
God.

We don’t hear much about the “Sermon on the Mount” here in Kansas anymore.

Yeah.  Because these Christians don’t really believe in Jesus.  They believe in power and authority.